From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CREATE SEQUENCE with RESTART option
Date: 2021-07-28 06:20:02
Message-ID: YQD3Eh3kAnJHdL/
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 04:57:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> FWIW, like Ashutosh upthread, my vote would be to do nothing here in
> terms of behavior changes as this is just breaking a behavior for the
> sake of breaking it, so there are chances that this is going to piss
> some users that relied accidentally on the existing behavior.

In short, I would be tempted with something like the attached, that
documents RESTART in CREATE SEQUENCE, while describing its behavior
according to START. In terms of regression tests, there is already a
lot in this area with ALTER SEQUENCE, but I think that having two
tests makes sense for CREATE SEQUENCE: one for RESTART without a
value and one with, where both explicitely set START.


Attachment Content-Type Size
create-sequence-restart.patch text/x-diff 3.4 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2021-07-28 06:22:30 Re: pg_receivewal starting position
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-07-28 05:02:41 Re: alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD